Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:17:48 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] utrace-based ftrace "process" engine, v2 |
| |
* Diego Calleja <diegocg@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sábado 21 Marzo 2009 16:45:01 Ingo Molnar escribió: > > > The main issue i see is that no kernel developer i work with on a > > daily basis uses SystemTap - and i work with a lot of people. Yes, i > > could perhaps name two or three people from lkml using it, but its > > average penetration amongst kernel folks is essentially zero. > > What about userspace developers? People always talks of systemtap > as a kernel thing, but my (humble) impression is that kernel > hackers don't seem to need it that much (maybe for the same > reasons they didn't a kernel debugger ;), but userspace developers > do. There're many userspace projects that offer optional compile > options to enable dtrace probes (some people like apple even ship > executables of python, perl and ruby with probes by default). > There're several firefox hackers that switched to dtrace-capable > systems just because the dtrace-javascript probes enabled them to > debug javashit code in ways they weren't able in linux or windows. > > In my humble opinion a better development environment for linux > userspace programmers is way more important than whether kernel > hackers like systemtap or not. So maybe the discussion should be > less about "does it help kernel hackers?" and more about "does it > help userspace hackers?". My 2¢...
Well, i consider kernel development to be just another form of software development, so i dont subscribe to the view that it is intrinsically different. (Yes, the kernel has many unique aspects - but most software projects have unique aspects.)
In terms of development methodology and tools, in fact i claim that the kernel workflow and style of development can be applied to most user-space software projects with great success.
So ... if a new development tool is apparently not (yet?) suited to a very large and sanely developed software project like the Linux kernel, i dont take that as an encouraging sign.
Also, there's practical aspects: the kernel is what we know best so if we can make it work well for the kernel, hopes are that other large projects can use it too. If we _only_ make the tool good for non-kernel purposes, who else will fix it for the kernel? The icentive to fix it for the kernel will be significantly lower.
Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |